MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986141190 · doi:10.3163/1536-5050.100.4.015

Development of a post-master's online certificate in health sciences librarianship

2012· article· en· W1986141190 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ester Saghafi, Nancy Hrinya Tannery, Barbara A. Epstein, Susan Alman, Christinger Tomer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Medical Library Association JMLA · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. National Library of MedicineUniversity at BuffaloUniversity of PittsburghMedical Library AssociationUniversity of California, Los AngelesYork UniversityInstitute of Museum and Library Services
KeywordsMedical libraryCertificateLibrary scienceMedical educationLifelong learningBiomedical sciencesProcess (computing)Health carePublic relationsSociologyPolitical scienceMedicinePedagogyNursingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health sciences librarians function in environments that are constantly undergoing rapid and drastic changes in a range of divergent arenas, including scientific, technological, social, political, and financial changes. To keep up with these changes, health sciences librarians require lifelong learning opportunities. The Medical Library Association (MLA) recommends that library educators provide opportunities and programs to meet the librarians' need to “retool their skills” throughout their professional careers [1]. In this brief communication, the authors describe the process of developing and implementing an online, fifteen-credit, post-master's certificate of advanced study in health sciences librarianship (HealthCAS) and the steps we followed during this process.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.010

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.311
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.160 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Medical Library Association JMLASame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207